Was 911 all planned?
- Thread starter SeoReborn
- Start date
- Status
Interesting collection of videos examining the video of the planes and how the planes have been added in, when infact it could have been a missile:
http://www.911hoax.com/domaincloak.asp?URL=http%3A%2F%2F100777%2Ecom%2F911%2Ftv%5Ffakery
http://www.911hoax.com/domaincloak.asp?URL=http%3A%2F%2F100777%2Ecom%2F911%2Ftv%5Ffakery
Just adding more food for thought...
I put together these images back when I was doing my uber 9/11 research.
I made a still frame from a video of a demolition worker explaining how thermate (thermite + sulfur) is used in the demolition industry to "cut through steel beams like butter" as they say. The quote on the images is verbatim.
This juxtaposed with images of Ground zero with highly angled beam cuts in the background.
I put together these images back when I was doing my uber 9/11 research.
I made a still frame from a video of a demolition worker explaining how thermate (thermite + sulfur) is used in the demolition industry to "cut through steel beams like butter" as they say. The quote on the images is verbatim.
This juxtaposed with images of Ground zero with highly angled beam cuts in the background.
Wouldn't there be some sort of thermate residue or other clues left behind on those beams?
Also, the guy says "a series of beams cut at the same angle". The beams you circled are not the same angle. Some are very steep angles while a few are almost flat.
Also, aren't there many other explanations for the beams you circled in the photos? Off the top of my head I could say that maybe they had to cut away those beams as part of the cleaning up/removal process after the buildings came down.
If I say that if I wanted to heat a home I'd burn wood, that doesn't mean that somebody else wouldn't use coal, or gas. It also doesn't mean that if I see a burnt piece of wood that it means somebody was trying to heat a home. Sure, demolition may involve cutting beams like butter, and a few of the beams in the photos you circled have a similar look to them, but to say that there aren't many other more reasonable explanations is just plain silly.
Also, the guy says "a series of beams cut at the same angle". The beams you circled are not the same angle. Some are very steep angles while a few are almost flat.
Also, aren't there many other explanations for the beams you circled in the photos? Off the top of my head I could say that maybe they had to cut away those beams as part of the cleaning up/removal process after the buildings came down.
If I say that if I wanted to heat a home I'd burn wood, that doesn't mean that somebody else wouldn't use coal, or gas. It also doesn't mean that if I see a burnt piece of wood that it means somebody was trying to heat a home. Sure, demolition may involve cutting beams like butter, and a few of the beams in the photos you circled have a similar look to them, but to say that there aren't many other more reasonable explanations is just plain silly.
It's not just the cuts. The collapse, did that not seem very familiar? Like you've seen a collapse like that before?
The two towers, and especially tower 7 collapsed perfectly, the two towers had heavy damage so you you could argue that was the reason for the collapse. But building 7 was not severely damaged yet it collapsed. You even have the owner of building 7 on video saying he decided they had to pull it, and it did come down, perfectly.
What more do you need?
The two towers, and especially tower 7 collapsed perfectly, the two towers had heavy damage so you you could argue that was the reason for the collapse. But building 7 was not severely damaged yet it collapsed. You even have the owner of building 7 on video saying he decided they had to pull it, and it did come down, perfectly.
What more do you need?
You can play devil's advocate all you like....so you're saying it's pure coincidence that demolition teams cut steel beams at angles while we have a large array of beams showing these exact same cuts?
Also if you look at the 2nd picture you'll notice on the beam is a greyish blackish sludge dripping down from the top of the beam. That is solidified molten steel. The sulfur in thermate acts as a heat catalyst to help the cutting of steel, thus producing extremely hot temperatures and leaving behind solidified molten.
Why wasn't this looked into you ask? Ask Giuliani and the 9/11 commission...all of the evidence from ground zero was shipped to india/china for recycling soon after. All 3rd party investigation teams were barred from performing any unfettered investigations. Suddenly the word of the 9/11 commission became the word of God...there are so many holes in that commission report it's appalling.
Last edited:
The one thing that got me thinking... was when I heard that the twin tower site was never properly investigated after 911. I guess they had guys with guns preventing people from investigating or something.
Not sure if that's true or not, just what I heard. Something to think about though.
Not sure if that's true or not, just what I heard. Something to think about though.
Guess sidestepping my points is the easiest route eh?
What's more likely...
That the beams were cut as you said, even though they weren't cut evenly and were left their as evidence to stir up conspiracy theorists, yet probably didn't leave any thermate residue or anything like that around, all the while having thousands of people cover up one of the biggest tradgedies in history....
OR
the beams were cut after the fact to clean up the debris and/or to find survivors or evidence of what happened
OR
the beams snapped like that
OR
any other number of things could have happened
Oh and the sludge thing you refered to, yeah, that would be in all my situations as well, especially since the tower's structure failure was likely due to the heat making the beams structurally weak.
As for not letting 3rd parties investigate... well.. let's see. If I was in charge, and the biggest act of aggression towards my country just happened, I'm pretty sure I'd lock down the site and make sure only trusted people get in their to find out what really happened before anybody is able to possibly mess up the evidence. I'd want to know who, what, where, why, when, and how before anybody got to touch it outside the official investigators.
I'm pretty sure the police don't let reporters come in and trample a crime scene before they've figured out what happened.
You might wanna try actually researching a topic before engaging in debate about it. What you're saying is just regurgitated Fox news rhetoric.
You didn't really make any, besides a weak analogy.
I'm honestly done with show and tell now...i don't have enough time in my day to debate with people who like to hear what's convenient.
And i'm sure none of this matters to you, so in that case I have 2 strong words for you : BUILDING 7
You didn't really make any, besides a weak analogy.
You think that every piece of steel needs to have an identical cut to find it plausible? We're talking about cutting steel beams not cookie cutting gingerbread men. Every piece of steel is going to act differently, and unless you had a calibrated machine attaching the explosives to the beams you're going to have different angles and cuts due to human involvement.
They cut the beams the same way demolition teams do right?
Again, they just happened to "snap" the same way demolition teams cut them right?
No other buildings in the history of architecture have ever collapsed due to fire. None. Research the buildings in Philadelphia, Los Angeles that raged for far longer periods of time than the towers and didn't collapse. And for fun let's look at the tower in Madrid that burned 18x longer than WTC, was structurally less sound and did not collapse.
You obviously have way too much faith in the people that run this country. Do you think they actually care about you, or me, or 3000 ppl? Shit...
I'm honestly done with show and tell now...i don't have enough time in my day to debate with people who like to hear what's convenient.
And i'm sure none of this matters to you, so in that case I have 2 strong words for you : BUILDING 7
You might wanna try actually researching a topic before engaging in debate about it. What you're saying is just regurgitated Fox news rhetoric.
You didn't really make any, besides a weak analogy.
You think that every piece of steel needs to have an identical cut to find it plausible? We're talking about cutting steel beams not cookie cutting gingerbread men. Every piece of steel is going to act differently, and unless you had a calibrated machine attaching the explosives to the beams you're going to have different angles and cuts due to human involvement.
They cut the beams the same way demolition teams do right?
Again, they just happened to "snap" the same way demolition teams cut them right?
No other buildings in the history of architecture have ever collapsed due to fire. None. Research the buildings in Philadelphia, Los Angeles that raged for far longer periods of time than the towers and didn't collapse. And for fun let's look at the tower in Madrid that burned 18x longer than WTC, was structurally less sound and did not collapse.
You obviously have way too much faith in the people that run this country. Do you think they actually care about you, or me, or 3000 ppl? Shit...
I'm honestly done with show and tell now...i don't have enough time in my day to debate with people who like to hear what's convenient.
And i'm sure none of this matters to you, so in that case I have 2 strong words for you : BUILDING 7
You obviously have all the answers, so who exactly was behind this and why? Please name names and motives.
As far as building 7 goes, I'm pretty sure, but not completely that it was demolished on purpose because it was weakened by the collapses of the twin towers.
For those who put their unwavering faith in the government should research the word "propaganda".
To know that something is planned and who is behind it, is two different issues. If someone got shot, you don't need to know exactly who did it to prove that the gun was triggered by someone.
To know that something is planned and who is behind it, is two different issues. If someone got shot, you don't need to know exactly who did it to prove that the gun was triggered by someone.
I'm with you on this, but before someone else points it out I just want to clarify... I assume you are talking about steel constructed buildings? Surely many wooden buildings have collapsed due to fire.
As for who is behind it... well look at who has gained. Some guy in a cave in Pakistan and his loose collection of associates? Or the recipients of billions of dollars of insurance payouts and supply contracts for the shit that followed.
Then there's the PNAC...
"..the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor"
Pearl Harbour was allowed to happen, I used to think that was the case with 9/11, but that doesn't add up. It seems more like the Reichstag fire.
Yeah, I suppose you believe we didn't go to the moon either... The problem with conspiracy theories on this scale is they always bring up more questions than they can ever answer.
Is this the same government that couldn't keep a blow job in the White House quiet?
Oh, and as for other buildings never collapsing, I guess they have just never been flooded with around 90,000 liters of Jet Fuel.
Is this the same government that couldn't keep a blow job in the White House quiet?
Oh, and as for other buildings never collapsing, I guess they have just never been flooded with around 90,000 liters of Jet Fuel.
I don't have unwavering faith in the government, I actually think most of government is full of incompetent fools. (have you been to any government agency lately?)
Bluejam has a point, to keep a conspiracy theory of this magnitude quiet is almost impossible, especially considering the amount of people wanting to do political damage to Bush.
So if I have this correct, I am to believe that Bush the bumbling idiot who doesn't know how to tie his shoes, somehow masterminded the biggest conspiracy so his buddies who are already filthy rich and powerful could gain contracts in Iraq? And in the process create for himself a political nightmare of enormous consequences that has caused many of his other buddies to lose their seats in the house and senate. All the while ruining his legacy with the lowest approval ratings of most presidents?
I think the point is that conspiracy theorists are the ones putting their "unwavering faith in the government" by claiming they would be capable of this, whereas the major counter-argument is that the US government couldnt organise a piss up in brewery let alone plan a conspiracy of this scale.
Something like this is believeable on a small scale, but at 9/11 size? No chance. How many people would have to be involved to pull this off? Where is this middle-class medium wage demolition crew that wired the building? Ok no crew, the secret governmental agents that planned it also had professional demolition experience, right? Hmm...
All of those individuals who were involved, sitting there, keeping quiet while this huge crime against humanity goes unpunished? Too many people required and somone would have talked within 7 years.
Occam's razor guys.
There are unanswered questions and variables but it does not disprove that 911 has been planned. The main thing is, sacrifices had to be made for the greater goal.
Would you release information so significant that you and your family would be put in danger while people think you're a bonker consipracy theorist? I wouldn't.
Occams Razor cuts two ways. You are assuming that one group did it as we have been told they want to. Their crazy. Their fanatics. They are not like us. They are different religions.
Not that they have EVER done a job like this with this complication in an almost perfect fashion. Also the plan seemed to allow for delays in flight takeoffs.
Or did another group did it. They have unlimited amounts of money, knowledge, espionage, tracking of materials, people and can compensate for it all. They have access to the buildings. They have access to the best demolition people in the world. They have hundreds or even thousands of people who have proven their ability to get things done with no moral complications. If someone flew planes into a building in the United States, with USA made planes, on an airline with American ownership, while using security influenced by the Bush family, and controlled the handling of the "proof" the building materials which happened in the US who would be better to do that then some aspect of the US military espionage grid.
And who the hell ever said Bush Jr. did this or planned this? Heck he had only been in office for less than 8 months. This was done by someone with a lot of planning.
And I am not asking for people to be junior investigators. Just don't believe the story and dont invade countries using it as an excuse.
- Status